Advertisement

Autonomous Robots

, Volume 1, Issue 1, pp 27–52 | Cite as

Communication in reactive multiagent robotic systems

  • Tucker Balch
  • Ronald C. Arkin
Article

Abstract

Multiple cooperating robots are able to complete many tasks more quickly and reliably than one robot alone. Communication between the robots can multiply their capabilities and effectiveness, but to what extent? In this research, the importance of communication in robotic societies is investigated through experiments on both simulated and real robots. Performance was measured for three different types of communication for three different tasks. The levels of communication are progressively more complex and potentially more expensive to implement. For some tasks, communication can significantly improve performance, but for others inter-agent communication is apparently unnecessary. In cases where communication helps, the lowest level of communication is almost as effective as the more complex type. The bulk of these results are derived from thousands of simulations run with randomly generated initial conditions. The simulation results help determine appropriate parameters for the reactive control system which was ported for tests on Denning mobile robots.

Keywords

multiagent system mobile robots social communication 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Altenburg, K. and Pavicic, M. 1993. Initial Results of the Use of Inter-Robot Communication for a Multiple, Mobile Robotic System,Working Notes of the Workshop on Dynamically Interacting Robots at IJCAI-93, pp. 95–100.Google Scholar
  2. Altmann, S. 1974. Baboons, Space, Time, and Energy.American Zoology, 14:221–248.Google Scholar
  3. Arkin, R.C. 1989. Motor Schema Based Mobile Robot Navigation,International Journal of Robotics Research, vol 8(4), pp. 92–112.Google Scholar
  4. Arkin, R.C. 1990. The Impact of Cybernetics on the Design of a Mobile Robot System: A Case Study.IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Vol. 20, No. 6, pp. 1245–1257.Google Scholar
  5. Arkin, R.C. 1992. Cooperation without Communication: Multi-agent Schema Based Robot Navigation,Journal of Robotic Systems, Vol. 9(3), pp. 351–364.Google Scholar
  6. Arkin, R.C. 1992. Integrating Behavioral, Perceptual, and World Knowledge in Reactive Navigation.Designing Autonomous Agents, ed. P. Maes, Bradford-MIT Press, pp. 105–122.Google Scholar
  7. Arkin, R.C. 1992. Modeling Neural Function at the Schema Level: Implications and Results for Robotic Control.Biological Neural Networks in Invertebrate Neuroethology and Robotics, ed. R. Beer, R. Ritzmann, and T. McKenna, Academic Press, pp. 383–410.Google Scholar
  8. Arkin, R.C. 1993. Survivable Robotic Systems: Reactive and Homeostatic Control.Robotics and Remote Systems for Hazardous Environments, ed. M. Jamshidi and P. Eicker, Prentice-Hall, pp. 135–154.Google Scholar
  9. Arkin, R.C., Balch, T., and Nitz, E. 1993. Communication of Behavioral State in Multi-agent Retrieval Tasks,Proc. 1993 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Atlanta, GA, vol. 1, p. 678.Google Scholar
  10. Arkin, R.C. and Hobbs, J.D. 1992. Dimensions of Communication and Social Organization in Multi-Agent Robotic Systems,From animals to animats 2: Proc. 2nd International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior, Honolulu, HI, Dec. 1992, MIT Press, pp. 486–493.Google Scholar
  11. Arkin, R.C. and MacKenzie, D. 1994. “Temporal Coordination of Perceptual Algorithms for Mobile Robot Navigation,” to appear inIEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation. Google Scholar
  12. Arkin, R.C., Murphy, R.R., Pearson, M., and Vaughn, D. 1989. Mobile Robot Docking Operations in a Manufacturing Environment: Progress in Visual Perceptual Strategies,Proc. IEEE International Workshop on Intelligent Robots and Systems '89, Tsukuba, Japan, pp. 147–154.Google Scholar
  13. Arkin, R.C., et al. 1993. Buzz: An Instantiation of a Schema-Based Reactive Robotic System,Proc. International Conference on Intelligent Autonomous Systems: IAS-3, Pittsburgh, PA., pp. 418–427.Google Scholar
  14. Balch, T. and Arkin, R.C. 1993. Avoiding the Past: A Simple but Effective Strategy for Reactive Navigation,Proc. 1993 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Atlanta, GA, vol. 1, pp. 678–685.Google Scholar
  15. Brooks, R.A. 1986. A Robust Layered Control System for a Mobile Robot,IEEE Journal of Robotics and Automation, RA-2, No. 1, p. 14, 1986.Google Scholar
  16. Brooks, R., Maes, P., Mataric, M., and More, G. 1990. Lunar Base Construction Robots,IEEE International Workshop on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS '90), Tsuchiura, Japan. pp. 389–392.Google Scholar
  17. Clark, R.J., Arkin, R.C., and Ram, A. 1992. Learning Momentum: On-line Performance Enhancement for Reactive Systems.Proc. 1992 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Nice, France, May 1992, pp. 111–116.Google Scholar
  18. Croy, M. and Hughes, R. 1991. Effects of Food Supply, Hunger, Danger, and Competition on choice of Foraging Location by the fifteen-spined stickleback.Animal Behavior, 1991, Vol. 42, pp. 131–139.Google Scholar
  19. Dudek, G., Jenkin, M., Milios, E., and Wilkes, D. 1993. A Taxonomy for Swarm Robots.Proc. 1993 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). Yokohama, Japan, pp. 441–447.Google Scholar
  20. Drogoul, A. and Ferber, J. 1992. From Tom Thumb to the Dockers: Some Experiments with Foraging Robots.From Animals to Animats: Proc. 2nd International Conference on the Simulation of Adaptive Behavior, MIT Press/Bradford Books, Honolulu, HI, pp. 451–459.Google Scholar
  21. Floreano, D. 1993. Emergence of Nest-based Foraging Strategies in Ecosystems of Neural Networks.From Animals to Animats: Proc. 2nd International Conference on the Simulation of Adaptive Behavior, MIT Press/Bradford Books, Honolulu, HI, pp. 410–416.Google Scholar
  22. Franklin, R.F. and Harmon, L.A., 1987. Elements of Cooperative Behavior. Internal Research and Development Final Report 655404-1-F, Environmental Research Institute of Michigan (ERIM), Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
  23. Franks, N. 1986. Teams in Social Insects: Group Retrieval of pre by army ants.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 18:425–429.Google Scholar
  24. Fukuda, T., Nakagawa, S., Kawauchi, Y., and Buss, M. 1989. Structure Decision for Self Organising Robots Based on Cell Structures—CEBOT.IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Scottsdale Arizona, pp. 695–700.Google Scholar
  25. Goetsch, W. 1957.The Ants. University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  26. Goss, S., Beckers, R., Deneubourg, J., Aron, S., and Pasteels, J. 1990. How Trail Laying and Trail Following can Solve Foraging Problems for Ant Colonies.Behavioral Mechanisms of Food Selection, ed. R.N. Hughes, Nato ASI Series, Vol. G. 20, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 661–678.Google Scholar
  27. Hackwood, S. and Beni, S. 1992. Self-organization of Sensors for Swarm Intelligence,1992 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Nice, pp. 819–829.Google Scholar
  28. Helmbold, D. and McDowell, C. 1990. Modelling Speedup(n) Greater than n,IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol 1(2), pp. 250–256.Google Scholar
  29. Holldobler, B. and Wilson, E. 1990.The Ants, Belknap Press, Cambridge Mass.Google Scholar
  30. Kaelbling, L. and Rosechein, S. 1990. “Action and Planning in Embedded Agents,” inDesigning Autonomous Agents, Maes, P. (ed), MIT Press, pp. 35–48.Google Scholar
  31. Kaufmann, J. 1974. Social Ethology of the Whiptail Wallaby, macropus Parryi, in Northeastern New South Wales.Animal Behavior. 22:281–369.Google Scholar
  32. Khatib, O. 1985. “Real-time Obstacle Avoidance for Manipulators and Mobile Robots,”Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation, St. Louis, p. 500.Google Scholar
  33. Krogh, B. 1984. A Generalized Potential Field Approach to Obstacle Avoidance Control,SME — RI Technical Paper MS84-484.Google Scholar
  34. Lee, J., Huber, M., Durfee, E., and Kenny, P. 1994. UMPRS: An Implementation of the Procedural Reasoning System for Multirobot Applications. To appearAIAA/NASA Conference on Intelligent Robots in Field, Factory, Service, and Space (CIRFFSS '94). Google Scholar
  35. MacKenzie, D. and Arkin, R.C. 1992. Autonomous Helicopter Position Determination Using an On-Board Integrated Vision System,Proc. SME Applied Vision Conference '92, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  36. MacKenzie, D. and Arkin, R.C. 1993. Formal Specification for Behavior-Based Mobile Robots,Proc. SPIE Conference on Mobile Robots VIII, Boston, MA, pp. 94–104.Google Scholar
  37. MacKenzie, D.C. and Balch, T.R. 1993. Making a Clean Sweep: Behavior Based Vacuuming.Working Notes of 1993 AAAI Fall Symposium: Instantiating Real-World Agents. Raleigh, N.C.Google Scholar
  38. MacLennan, B. 1991. Synthetic Ethology: An Approach to the Study of Communication. InArtificial Life II, SFI Studies in the Sciences of Complexity, vol. XI, ed. Farmer et al, Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  39. Maes, P. 1991. Situated Agents can have Goals, inDesigning Autonomous Agents, Maes, P. (ed), MIT Press, pp. 49–70.Google Scholar
  40. Mataric, M. 1992. Minimizing Complexity in Controlling a Mobile Robot Population.Proc. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Nice, FR, May 1992.Google Scholar
  41. Miller, D. 1990. Multiple Behavior-Controlled Micro-Robots for Planetary Surface Missions.Proc. 1990 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Los Angeles, CA, November 1990, pp. 289–292.Google Scholar
  42. Moynihan, M. 1970. Control, Suppression, Decay, Disappearance and Replacement of Displays.Journal of Theoretical Biology, 29:85–112.Google Scholar
  43. Noreils, F.R. 1992. “Battlefield Strategies and Coordination between Mobile Robots”,Proc. 1992 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 1777–1784.Google Scholar
  44. Noreils, F. 1993. Coordinated Protocols: An Approach to Formalize Coordination between Mobile Robots.Proc. 1992 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 717–725.Google Scholar
  45. Parker, L. 1993. Adaptive Action Selection for Cooperative Agent Teams.From Animals to Animats: Proc. 2nd International Conference on the Simulation of Adaptive Behavior, MIT Press/Bradford Books, Honolulu, HI, pp. 442–450.Google Scholar
  46. Payton, D.W. 1991. Internalized Plans: A Representation for Action Resources, inDesigning Autonomous Agents, Maes, P. (ed), MIT Press, pp. 89–103.Google Scholar
  47. Pearce, M., Arkin, R.C., and Ram, A. 1992. The Learning of Reactive Control Parameters through Genetic Algorithms,Proc. 1992 International Conference on Intelligent Robotics and Systems (IROS), Raleigh, N.C., pp. 130–137.Google Scholar
  48. Ram, A., Arkin, R.C., Moorman, K., and Clark, R. 1992. Case-based Reactive Navigation: A case-based method for on-line selection and adaptation of reactive control parameters in autonomous robotic systems, Technical Report GIT-CC-92/57, College of Computing, Georgia Tech.Google Scholar
  49. Slack, M.G. 1990. Situationally Driven Local Navigation for Mobile Robots,JPL Publication 90-17, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA.Google Scholar
  50. Tinbergen 1966.Social Behavior in Animals, Methuen & Co., London.Google Scholar
  51. Wang, J. 1992. “Distributed Mutual Exclusion based on Dynamic Costs,”Proc. IEEE International Symposium on Intelligent Control, Glasgow, UK, pp. 109–15.Google Scholar
  52. Werner, G. and Dyer, M. 1990. Evolution of Communication in Artificial Organisms.Technical Report UCLA-AI-90-06, AI Laboratory, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  53. Yanco, H. and Stein, L. 1993. An Adaptive Communication Protocol for Cooperating Mobile Robots.From Animals to Animats: Proc. 2nd International Conference on the Simulation of Adaptive Behavior, MIT Press/Bradford Books, Honolulu, HI, pp. 478–485.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tucker Balch
    • 1
  • Ronald C. Arkin
    • 1
  1. 1.Mobile Robot LaboratoryCollege of Computing, Georgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations